Leviticus 5:6

6. his guilt offering] The Heb. word ’âshâm, guilt, here and in Lev_5:7 is also translated guilt (trespass A.V.) offering in Lev_5:15-16; Lev_5:18, Lev_6:6 (for the attitude of the Heb. mind which led to this ambiguity in the sense of ’âshâm see Kennett, etc. Conceptions of Righteousness and Sin, p. 8). But the offering here brought is described as a Sin-Offering, and the two birds of Lev_5:7 are intended the one for a Sin-Offering, and the other for a Burnt-Offering. Moreover the substitute for the offering of Lev_5:7-10 (Lev_5:11-13) is twice called a Sin-Offering. In the regulations for the Sin-Offering (Lev_4:13; Lev_4:22; Lev_4:27, Lev_5:2-4) the bringer of a Sin-Offering is described as guilty (’âshçm), and from 2Ki_12:16 (‘money for the guilt offerings,’ A.V. ‘trespass money,’ Heb. késeph’âshâm) it appears that Guilt-Offerings were sometimes brought in money. It seems that in these verses the Sin-Offering is regarded as a fine due from one who is guilty, and the clause might be translated ‘and he shall bring as his guilt-fine unto the Lord,’ and similarly in Lev_5:7. From the LXX. rendering in Lev_5:7 it is possible, but by no means certain, that they read ‘he shall bring his Sin-Offering for that wherein he hath sinned.’ If this reading be adopted, the unusual meaning of’ âshâm will be confined to Lev_5:6.

for his sin which he hath sinned] more literally, as his penalty which he has incurred by sin.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Lev 5:6 And he shall bring his trespass offering unto the LORD for his sin which he hath sinned, a female from the flock, a lamb or a kid of the goats, for a sin offering; and the priest shall make an atonement for him concerning his sin.

Ver. 6. For his sin which he hath sinned.] Bending his thoughts upon that particular sin. It is charged upon Israel, that they "remembered not that they lay in their blood." {Eze 16:22}

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Lev 5:6. His trespass-offering — But how come confession and sacrifice to be necessary for him that touched an unclean thing, when such persons were cleansed with simple washing, as appears from Leviticus 11., and Numbers 19.? This place speaks of him that being so unclean did come into the tabernacle, as may be gathered by comparing this place with Num 19:13; which if any man did, knowing himself to be unclean, which was the case there, he was to be cut off for it; and if he did it ignorantly, which was the case here, he was, upon discovery of it, to offer this sacrifice.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

5:6 The penalty was apparently fulfilled by the required sacrifice (see study note on 4:1–5:13). • The actions described in 5:1-5 best fit those of a layperson, so a female offering was permitted, in keeping with the principle demonstrated in 4:28, 32.

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

he shall bring his trespass offering unto the Lord for his sins which he hath sinned--A trespass offering differed from a sin offering in the following respects: that it was appointed for persons who had either done evil unwittingly, or were in doubt as to their own criminality; or felt themselves in such a special situation as required sacrifices of that kind [BROWN]. The trespass offering appointed in such cases was a female lamb or kid; if unable to make such an offering, he might bring a pair of turtledoves or two young pigeons--the one to be offered for a sin offering, the other for a burnt offering; or if even that was beyond his ability, the law would be satisfied with the tenth part of an ephah of fine flour without oil or frankincense.

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

(6) And he shall bring his trespass offering . . . a lamb or a kid of the goats.—Better, a sheep, or a shaggy she-goat (see Lev_4:23; Lev_4:32). The first thing to be noticed is that the sacrifice is here called (âshâm) “trespass offering,” which is the right rendering of the word, and is so translated in thirty-five out of the thirty-six passages in which it is used for a sacrifice. In the verse before us, and in the rest of this section, viz., Lev_5:7-13, which treat of this sacrifice, no distinction is made between the ranks of the offenders. There is no special legislation for the high priest, the whole congregation, or the prince, as in the case with the (châtâth) sin offering, which is described in the former chapter. The spiritual officer and temporal sovereign are here on a level with the ordinary layman. There is no scale in the sacrifices corresponding to the position of the sinner. They are all alike to bring the same victim, either sheep or she goat. Though nothing is here said about the sacrificial rites which were to be performed in connection with the victim, in this case it is implied that, apart from the minor deviations here specified, they were to be the same as those in connection with the sin offering. The rule which obtained during the second Temple, is as follows: the trespass offerings were killed, and their blood sprinkled, as is before described in Numbers 4; they were then flayed, the fat and the inwards taken out and salted, and strewed on the fire upon the altar. The residue of this flesh was eaten by the priests in the court, like the sin offerings.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

And he shall bring his trespass offering unto the Lord, for the sin which he hath sinned,.... To make atonement for it; this was typical of the sacrifice of Christ, whose soul was made an offering for sin, "Asham" a trespass offering, Isa 53:10 where the same word is used as here:

a female from the flock, a lamb, or kid of the goats, for a sin offering; it is generally thought there was a difference between a trespass offering and a sin offering; but it is not easy to say wherein the difference lies; and what has been observed by learned men is not very satisfactory: and certain it is, that the same offering is here called both a trespass offering and a sin offering; and such as were men of substance, and capable of it, were to bring a female lamb or kid; it being for sins of ignorance, a sacrifice of a less value was admitted; yet it must be a lamb, typical of Christ the Lamb of God; and atonement cannot be made, even for sins of ignorance, but by the blood and sacrifice of Christ:

and the priest shall make an atonement for him concerning his sin; that is, by offering his sacrifice for him, which was a type of the atonement made by the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without spot and blemish.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Quest. How comes confession and a sacrifice to be necessary for him that touched an unclean thing, when such persons were cleansed with simple washing, as appears from Le 11; Num 19?

Answ. This place speaks of him that being so unclean did come into the tabernacle, as may be gathered by comparing this place with Num 19:13, which if any man did, knowing himself to be unclean, which was the case there, he was to be cut off for it; and if he did it ignorantly, which is the case here, Lev 4:2, he was upon discovery of it to offer this sacrifice. Interpreters dispute much what the difference is between sins and trespasses, and between sin-offerings and trespass-offerings. Some make the one for omissions, the other for commissions; the one for greater, the other for lesser sins; the one for known sins, the other for sins of ignorance; in all which there seems to be more curiosity than solidity. Either they seem to be the same, as may be gathered from Lev 4:6, where those two words, asham and theta, which they so carefully and critically distinguish, are both used concerning the trespass-offerings, and from Lev 4:9; or the difference may be this, that sin-offerings were more indefinite or general, being for any particular sin, and trespass-offerings more restrained and particular, for such sins as were more scandalous and injurious, either to God by blasphemy, as Lev 4:1, or to his sanctuary, by approaching to it in one’s uncleanness, Lev 4:2,3, as hath been now said; or to one’s neighbour, by swearing to do to them either the good which we afterwards cannot or do not, or the evil which we should not; or to the priests and holy things of God, Lev 4:15.

A female; because those sins were less than others, as being committed ignorantly or unwittingly, and therefore God would accept a meaner sacrifice for them.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

6. Trespass offering… sin offering — These are here apparently used as equivalent or convertible terms. This constitutes the difficulty of discriminating between them confessed by Gesenius. He has scriptural grounds for viewing them as essentially identical in Lev_7:7, where it is said “as is the sin offering so is the trespass offering, there is one law for them.” Keil endeavours to maintain a difference by denying that asham, trespass offering, or rather guilt or debt offering, in this verse and the following, “means either guilt offering or debitum, (Knobel,) but culpa, guilt, or delictum, offence. But this meaning would not make good sense if substituted for trespass offering in this verse. Keil reads the next verse thus: “he shall bring as his guilt, that is, for the expiation of his guilt.” This is approved by Fairbairn, who resolves this double star into two distinct orbs by assuming that the asham, as an offering, is not spoken of till Lev_5:14, and then is limited to offences admitting of some sort of an estimation and recompense, and quotes Num_5:5-8 in proof. This view is now generally concurred in, also, by Hengstenberg, Keil, Bahr, Kurtz, and others. Professor Murphy’s distinction is this, in brief: in propitiation are two distinct things — expiation, the payment of the penalty, and satisfaction, the performance of the righteousness due to the law. The sin offering typifies chiefly the expiation, and the trespass offering the obedience or satisfaction. Every moral offence is both a sin and a trespass, hence both offerings may be made for the same act. But, if this theory be correct, both offerings ought to be made for every sin, in order to its perfect propitiation.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

His trespass-offering - But how comes confession and a sacrifice to be necessary for him that touched an unclean thing, when such persons were cleansed with simple washing, as appears from chap. xi, 25, 28, 32, 40, 43, and Num. xix, 7, 8, 10, 19? This place speaks of him that being so unclean did come into the tabernacle, as may be gathered by comparing this place with Num. xix, 13, which if any man did, knowing himself to be unclean, which was the case there, he was to be cut off for it; and if he did it ignorantly, which is the case here, he was upon discovery of it to offer this sacrifice.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

trespass offering

The trespass-offerings have in view rather the injury which sin does than its guilt-- which is the sin-offering aspect. What is due to God’s rights in every human being is here meant. Psa 51:4, is a perfect expression of this.

The Scofield Reference Bible (1917 edition), notes by C. I. Scofield — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.